RF detection between the pilot and the drone using frequency hopping spread spectrum , I can’t say I’m an expert in this field just stuff I picked up.
Absolutely none of that made any sense to me 
I’ll just see what Dronescanner can do if we happen to see it again 
In the UK you can, if the drone is under 250grams. Which in this case, is very likely.
Source: Where you can fly (points 3 to 9) | UK Civil Aviation Authority
The rules on minimum distances to people are different for drones and model aircraft below 250g, or UK0, UK1, C0 or C1 class.
You can fly a drone or model aircraft that’s below 250g, or UK0, UK1 or C0 class closer to uninvolved people than 50m and you can fly over them. From 1 January 2026 until 31 December 2027, you can also fly a C1 class drone or model aircraft closer to uninvolved people than 50m and you can fly over them.
This is part of the problem. Misinformation is constantly spread 
1 Like
But the destrinction is fly over, not hover over.
I mean, we can all argue technicalities, can’t we? 
1 Like
Permission would be required for filming/hovering over a back garden, even my partner agreed, but once you are no longer the center of the shot, permission isn’t required he said. Incidental background shots are legal. There is too many variables and unknowns to make a fair judgement (hovering for other reasons, camera not even pointing towards your garden, height of the drone). That’s best left to the authorities 
In this case, sure. But not in general.
Saying you can’t fly over people without permission is incorrect if under 250grams. This is why boundaries are constantly pushed because of misinformation. Auditing using a drone is popular for this reason. Because people say you can’t, when you legally can.
Sorry for commenting again lovely 
1 Like
Made my point for me - if you’re hovering, you’re in violation of the class restrictions.
I took the inference that if it was close enough to see clearly, then it wasn’t adhering to the restrictions, and also didn’t want to bamboozle anyone. I’ll rephrase. If someone is hovering in a place where you (as a homeowner) have a reasonable expectation of privacy, then that’s a potential breach of your privacy and data protection laws.
Repeated flights are a more serious breach.
In common sense speak - don’t fly your drone over someone’s garden, doubly-so when the drone is close enough to cause discomfort. If someone wants to argue the point of legality, have at it - was just trying to be helpful.
2 Likes
So it’s perfectly legal to use a sub-250g drone to see what your neighbours are doing in their back garden? I’m reading that correctly?
Who needs fences? They’re no obstacle for drones 
I do want to argue over the technicalities of “fly over” vs “hover over”.
To fly means to keep moving through the air. To hover means to stay stationary in the air.
I’m not saying that it would hold up in court if I argued that as my justification for blasting the drone with the garden hose, but…
No worries. I’m not here to argue. Just didn’t want misinformation, it’s hard enough to fly a drone legally and it’s only getting harder. Hover vs fly are two different things. I can only go off your original comment, which stated flying over people required permission. I’m glad we cleared that up
No, it’s not. I fly them for my job. To argue semantics, if someone were to literally fly over your garden, they’d be there for - at most - 1-2 seconds (unless your garden is huge).
So, I took the fairly straightforward view that the pilot was bordering on stationary. This isn’t a dig at you or anything @Tenshadesandme - I think you’re well within your rights to be concerned.
But if we’re going on literals, then yes - you can fly over your neighbour’s garden. But this doesn’t sound like that.
1 Like
I disagree, though I’m in America.
Drone pilots who claim “the FAA allows it, so you can’t stop me” are committing a fundamental legal error. They are confusing an administrative license with a property easement.
The FAA regulates, it doesn’t grant property access: The FAA gives a pilot permission to operate an aircraft. It does not grant that pilot a right-of-way to trespass on, or immediately above, your private land.
The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) regulates cars and licenses drivers. However, a DMV license does not give a driver the right to drive a car across your front lawn.
The FAA has “navigable airspace” authority to prevent planes from crashing. It does not have the constitutional authority to wipe out state property laws or authorize a private citizen to commit a civil trespass at 35 feet.
Now, even in England homeowners DO own airspace immediately above their homes/property too, up to a certain extent.
“Under English law, you do not own the sky infinitely upwards. Homeowners own the “lower stratum”—the airspace immediately above your land and structures up to a “reasonable height” necessary for your ordinary use and enjoyment. Above this, the airspace belongs to the public and is regulated by the state.”
So, if a drone if flown low over one’s backyard, even if it’s only for 1 or 2 seconds, it is illegal as they have trespassed on airspace that is owned by the homeowner. It’s just like trespassing on foot or car over a person’s property.
No, homeowners don’t own all the airspace above their homes, I didn’t say that. They don’t own much actually, but they do own some, in both England and here in the U.S.
So if a drone is too low, even if it’s only there for a short time, it’s illegal.
I just picked 35 feet, but that ins’t absolute. In America it goes up to 83 feet per the Causby Supreme Court Case.
35 Feet is within a homeowners “Immediate Reach”
- The Envelope of Use: A standard two-story home is roughly 25 to 30 feet tall. At 35 feet, a drone is operating directly within the functional envelope of the home.
- The Restatement (Second) of Torts: Under common law, a flight is a trespass if it enters the immediate airspace above the land and interferes substantially with the landowner’s use and enjoyment.
So even if a drone is only over one’s yard for a few seconds, if it’s that low over their property, it’s illegal, they are trespassing even though the drone is in the air.
No, @Tenshadesandme didn’t list a height, she said this:
Based upon her words, that drone WAS too low and it was trespassing as it was within airspace owned by tenshadesandme.
Again.
The Drone Pilots’ Argument: They usually say, “The FAA owns the airspace down to the ground, I’m fully licensed, and you don’t own the air.”
-
The Flaw: They are confusing airspace regulation with property rights. The FAA can regulate the drone, but they cannot legally wipe out a homeowner’s private property rights at 35 feet (or up to 83 feet per Causby).
-
Property Law’s Position: Property law (backed by Causby) says the federal government cannot simply declare the air right next to your bedroom window to be a “public highway” without infringing on your constitutional property rights.
-
Immediate Reach: 35 feet is well within the zone of your home’s “immediate reach.” It is lower than many mature trees, around the height of a standard two-story roofline, and directly impacts your ability to enjoy your backyard in peace.
All of this boils down to how high or low the drone is. Now how long or short a drone is over one’s yard, but how high or low it is, THAT is the crux of this.
At a certain point, the drone is not allowed to be over one’s property or yard, regardless of how long they are there.
Now, if they get high enough up, above 83 feet in the U.S., they can fly over people’s homes, yards etc. They can’t fly by at 19 feet, at 25 feet, at 39 feet though.
I’m in the UK, so FAA rules don’t apply here. We go by the Civil Aviation Authority so there may he some variation in the rules
No dig perceived @Chris77, you’re going by what you know. A lot of the information is very misleading, and AI doesn’t help. One minute Gemini was all up for me using gender reveal smoke cannons as emergency cover for a quick getaway (from the drone). The next minute, that would be illegal, even if I didn’t point it at the bloody thing!